Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

Kuala Lumpur (Sept 15, Thu): Malaysia will abolish an unpopular, colonial-era security law allowing detention without trial and relax other measures curbing the media and the right to free assembly, Prime Minister Najib Razak announced in a televised speech tonight.

The policy changes are the boldest by Datuk Seri Najib since he took the helm in April 2009 and are seen as a move to bolster support for his ruling coalition ahead of general elections, which are not due until 2013 but are widely expected next year.

Mr Najib said the Internal Security Act, which allows indefinite detention without trial, would be replaced with two new anti-terrorism laws that would ensure that the basic human rights of suspects are protected. He pledged that no individuals will be detained for their political ideologies.

Critics have long called for the security law to be repealed, saying that the government has abused it to silence dissidents.

Mr Najib said the government would also lift three emergency declarations and amend police laws to allow freedom of assembly according to international norms. He said a law requiring annual printing and publishing licences would be repealed, giving more freedom to media groups.

"It is time for Malaysians to move forward with new hope," he said. "Let there be no doubt that the Malaysia we are creating is a Malaysia which has a functional and inclusive democracy."

AP

This is HUGE. No doubt, cynics will say that Mr Najib is doing this merely to bolster his re-election chances, but these sweeping proposals will also have far-reaching political consequences beyond Malaysia — namely, in Singapore, which has equivalent laws.

It will be very interesting to see how my government will respond over the following days. If Malaysia can do this, why can't we?

This is HUGE. No doubt, cynics will say that Mr Najib is doing this merely to bolster his re-election chances, but these sweeping proposals will also have far-reaching political consequences beyond Malaysia — namely, in Singapore, which has equivalent laws.

It will be very interesting to see how my government will respond over the following days. If Malaysia can do this, why can't we?

They are playing with fire. All a terrorist/radical-courier has to do is to hire a lawyer and he will be bombing the Petrona Towers in no time.

Personally, I believe the ISA is there for a reason - to contain radicals and retards should there be insufficient evidence at that moment to hold them. Sure as the ruling parties had nothing better to do in the past 2-3 decades and thus abuse them, the ISA still has to be around because it is a security wildcard - it is better to have one random piece to play than have no cards to play.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

This is HUGE. No doubt, cynics will say that Mr Najib is doing this merely to bolster his re-election chances, but these sweeping proposals will also have far-reaching political consequences beyond Malaysia — namely, in Singapore, which has equivalent laws.

It will be very interesting to see how my government will respond over the following days. If Malaysia can do this, why can't we?

Much of the fear stemmed from a study by Dr. Andrew Wakefield, the now-disgraced British doctor who researchers believe falsified data for a 1998 study which convinced thousands of parents that vaccines are dangerous.

Its an interesting/tragic phenomenon how human beings seem to gravitate to crap ideas and disdain facts.

This is by far the most easily digestible explanation by Peter Joseph as to why our system needs a complete overhaul. Hopefully, people all over the world will begin to understand why technological unemployment is real and the jobs are not coming back.

We're pretty much developing our way out of work and the means to survive (somewhat hyperbolic statement, amg!). Between that and the way jobs most of us CBF'd doing are being sent to nations that still appreciate the ideal of doing what is needed to get food on the table you could say the first world nations are digging their own graves in the rush to make a buck. I know people that have stayed on Welfare because planting tree's or picking up rubbish is beneath them. Too much self entitlement on our part maybe?

Needs more cashless society like Star Trek imo (as impossible as it is).

The Star Trek quip was somewhat tounge in cheek. But what other expansion is there (I mean that seriously cause I'm coming up blank ATM)? Keeping in mind that any repetitive task that can be sucessfully automated will get that treatment, likewise if it's cheaper to outsource elsewhere. Those two are pretty big things to overcome. Even if we did have a cashless society or something so that outsourcing wasn't necessary the automation side of things wouldn't be gotten around if only because of pure efficiency (nevermind anything else like say automated cleaning robots or something). Expanding into space would be totally awesome though. But it really needs to change from being the domain of scientists and the military (I'd say that's one of the biggest reasons for public interest dropping in space programs, it's just not accessible to the common man). It'd be awesome to see space expansion that average folks can get in on - admittedly I'd expect there would have to be some big education changes though. I am in a slightly pessimistic mood today I guess.

Apologies for the format/tone wrote that on my phone which is disjointing.

Jobs lost due to technological advancement and automation will stay gone forever, so I agree that there will need to be a change, but not from that con-artist Joseph.

You mean he's stating the obvious. The money creation process is deathly screwed because of something called "adjustable rate", and the rate is controlled by Big Corp, not world governments or the IMF.

That guy wasted 16.21 of my life spouting the obvious and beating around the bush. It is either he is a confidence trickster, or he is a very lousy conman.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

I figure we'll all be doing little street performances and the money will just move from hat to hat as we amuse each other.

Screw the street performances. Use the time to grow potatoes in our backyard - at least there is a chance to have something to eat.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Jobs lost due to technological advancement and automation will stay gone forever, so I agree that there will need to be a change, but not from that con-artist Joseph.

Quote:

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

No, expansion (particularly space development) should solve the "too many laborers, not enough labor" problem, at least assuming all other issues were already solved.

These two statements contradict each other. The bulk of society is manual labor and service. The reason why it "appears" that technological unemployment is a non-issue is because traditionally sectors that become heavily automated cause a shift in workers toward another sector, typically one that involves another type of manufacturing or service. For example agriculture used to employ a massive amount of people, but today it's only a tiny fraction. However technology has allowed an unprecedented production increase, where it is technically possible to feed everyone on the planet with no issue. Where did the labor go? Factories. As factories have become more automated, where did the labor go? Service.

Technological advancement has surpassed the point (in fact it did this several decades ago) where it is by far more efficient and productive to automate rather than employ.

To put this another way: you'll be much more likely to be employed for space travel if you have a higher education in the sciences than you would as a manual laborer or service employee. You can see this right now actually, by looking at Defense: despite the size of the military industrial complex and how much money is poured into it, it isn't exactly setting record employment numbers. You simply don't need the labor force that you used to.

At some point society is going to have to paradigm shift. The system relies on consumers spending money earned from jobs. No jobs, no money, the system is unsustainable. Obviously things are more complex than that, but it's the simplest reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

That guy wasted 16.21 of my life spouting the obvious and beating around the bush. It is either he is a confidence trickster, or he is a very lousy conman.

What he's saying may be obvious to you or me, who have knowledge of things like this. It's not so obvious to many others, for a number of reasons (some which are already obvious to us of course).

Peter Joseph's biggest problem is that he's not good at layman explanations. He uses terms and phrases that confuse people and he spends more time than he should explaining what he means....which hurts his message. I get that he finds himself into the position of explaining what is a large scoped and multifaceted concept, but that should be all the more incentive to do a sort of "FAQ" and create bullet point sound bites he can repeat that anyone can understand.

Peter Joseph's biggest problem is that he's not good at layman explanations. He uses terms and phrases that confuse people and he spends more time than he should explaining what he means....which hurts his message. I get that he finds himself into the position of explaining what is a large scoped and multifaceted concept, but that should be all the more incentive to do a sort of "FAQ" and create bullet point sound bites he can repeat that anyone can understand.

And make another set of talking points memo? I thought we already have enough of Bill O'Reilly picking bits and pieces and creating some rubbish out of it.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Don't get me wrong, I knew you both would be one of the first ones to bash Peter's message, but to call him a conman it is pretty much dismissive behavior. The guy made his living in wall street for a very long time, he was part of the "rich" population who made more than 250k a year. He knows quite well how money and media work.

Quote:

but that should be all the more incentive to do a sort of "FAQ" and create bullet point sound bites he can repeat that anyone can understand.

There is already a FAQ that explains his points in detail, but I don't know if creating bullet points would be a smart choice. I think that bullet points discourage critical thinking.

There is already a FAQ that explains his points in detail, but I don't know if creating bullet points would be a smart choice. I think that bullet points discourage critical thinking.

Sauce please.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.